Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Privacy Analysis of FLoC

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 167 posts

Re: Privacy Analysis of FLoC

#141

Post by loosetypes »

I’ve read here that in prison, if inmates are learning to code without internet access that they’re given offline dumps of stack overflow. Or maybe offline Wikipedia in the library is a better example.

I’d really like to be able to buy preloaded offline versions of certain websites to be able to use indiscriminately.

For things like embarrassing questions which I might want to search for within a given subreddit without broadcasting it to who knows what systems.

I don’t even necessarily care if there’s a result, or even if the information/responses/comments are a decade stale - i can live without current events.

I just want the peace of mind that I’m not being observed. That’s something that I’d pay for.

Re: Privacy Analysis of FLoC

#142

Post by ByteWelder »

ridaj wrote: post #99

Well that's a great argument that it isn't perfect, but the real question is whether it's an improvement. Is it better than the state of the art, which is everyone dropping a shit ton of completely untraceable cookies? For example the browser fingerprinting piece that they highlight is already a problem with or without FLoC. I don't have an opinion about FLoC per se but this piece feels like it's focused on finding f…

If all other fingerprinting techniques would magically disappear, then FLoC is an improvement.

If other fingerprinting techniques stay, then it's actually worse, since there is now an extra data point to better identify users.

Re: Privacy Analysis of FLoC

#143

Post by leipert »

thiht wrote: post #135
leipert wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. I just dislike ads altogether. Especially Instagram feels very manipulative. So far nothing we have bought based on Instagram or Facebook ads has been useful in the long run. Personally I prefer to either have a need for something (I want to solve problem X) and do some research based off of that. Or I share an experience with a friend where they make a recommendation. Funniest Facebook ad by the way: I…

> So far nothing we have bought based on Instagram or Facebook ads has been useful in the long run. Why do you buy things you don't need just because you see an ad?

Well the ad has had it’s effect.

Hey this seems like an interesting appliance, tech gadget, item for camping or toy for a child. And then after some use and the novelty wore off it isn’t really that useful anymore.

Re: Privacy Analysis of FLoC

#144

Post by cdirkx »

_ZeD_ wrote: post #134
jedberg wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like personalized ads. If I have to suffer with ads to support the websites I like, I'd rather have them personalized. Instagram is really good at this -- I probably click on at least 1/4 of the ads I get, and have definitely made purchases based on Instagram ads. So as a user, the benefit would be better ads. Honestly I'll probably leave FLOC on if given the option (although I use Firefox and Safari, and as far as…

>>> I like personalized ads. why? no, seriously, why? "personalized" ad creeps me out, and I really don't understand how people can tolerate a banner like "We know you buyed Some Thing from amazon so we think you would like to purchase Related Thing from us" and not freak out

There are different levels of personalization. I won't be okay with something based on my search/purchasing/location history, psychological profile, personal details etc. But I would be okay with something targeted at my age, gender, and the content of the page I'm visiting.

Re: Privacy Analysis of FLoC

#145

Post by Nicksil »

mavhc wrote: post #70
wearywanderer wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Advertising is linked to depression, body dysmorphic disorders like anorexia, and numerous other adverse mental conditions. The advertising industry has a whole lot of blood on their hands. This is an industry that doesn't think twice about exploiting people's feelings of vulnerability or isolation to help sell products. The more vulnerable the demographic, the more abusive the advertising industry gets. Just look at…

On the plus side it gives free information to billions of people, now everyone can have free gps maps, email, websites

>On the plus side it gives free information to billions of people, now everyone can have free gps maps, email, websites

We've had that all along; for free. Nothing in this list is thanks to advertising.

Re: Privacy Analysis of FLoC

#146

Post by Nicksil »

jefftk wrote: post #65
driverdan wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I have to suffer with ads to support the websites I like You don't. Use an adblocker and be done with them.

And then how is the website jedberg likes supported?

>And then how is the website jedberg likes supported?

What a bizarre argument; the implication that advertising is the sole method of remuneration and sourcing support for some venture is the responsibility of anyone besides the venture. The idea just reeks of entitlement.

Re: Privacy Analysis of FLoC

#147

Post by doomslice »

ByteWelder wrote: post #142
ridaj wrote: post #99

Well that's a great argument that it isn't perfect, but the real question is whether it's an improvement. Is it better than the state of the art, which is everyone dropping a shit ton of completely untraceable cookies? For example the browser fingerprinting piece that they highlight is already a problem with or without FLoC. I don't have an opinion about FLoC per se but this piece feels like it's focused on finding f…

If all other fingerprinting techniques would magically disappear, then FLoC is an improvement. If other fingerprinting techniques stay, then it's actually worse, since there is now an extra data point to better identify users.

This is the reason they're introducing FLoC in the first place: https://www.chromium.org/Home/chromium-privacy/privacy-sandb...

Re: Privacy Analysis of FLoC

#148

Post by lawl »

HWR_14 wrote: post #120
lawl wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mind ads if they're not intrusive or even useful. HN has ads, in the form of job listings for YC companies. They don't bother me in the slightest, and if i lived in the US they might even provide value to me. The hundreds or thousands of ads i'd see if i'd surf without an adblocker do not. Maybe you do have a product i'm interested in and don't know about. But there's not hundreds of things i'm going to buy e…

HN has ads, but don't I have to go searching for them to find them? I think it's Stack Overflow's ad model too. We'll curate a group of readers that are appealing to people seeking jobs, put up a "jobs" tab, and charge companies to list openings.

Nope, they're injected into the frontpage sometimes. It's the entries without an upvote button and comment page.

Re: Privacy Analysis of FLoC

#149

Post by mavhc »

Nicksil wrote: post #145
mavhc wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the plus side it gives free information to billions of people, now everyone can have free gps maps, email, websites

>On the plus side it gives free information to billions of people, now everyone can have free gps maps, email, websites We've had that all along; for free. Nothing in this list is thanks to advertising.

Really? I remember people buying Satnavs and maps, and paying for email and hosting
Post reply on HN